Would have Southee in ahead of Broad tbh given the former's massive improvement over the past year or so.

You mean based on 3 matches against Sri Lanka and India, you'd take the guy averaging 35 over the guy who averages a chunk less, is also a far better batsman and has been just as good over 2 years even including the injured period?

You mean based on 3 matches against Sri Lanka and India, you'd take the guy averaging 35 over the guy who averages a chunk less, is also a far better batsman and has been just as good over 2 years even including the injured period?

I dunno. Yes if you look at their overall record in the past 2 years, it's absolutely no contest at all. But hypothetically, say Southee had been picked for England against India, and bowled as well on as he did for New Zealand in India and SL. Would you be dropping him to bring Broad back into the side for the New Zealand series?

Originally Posted by HeathDavisSpeed

I can think of a list of Sydney Grade posters who would contribute a better average post than Bahnz.

I think New Zealand are more likely to win a Test than draw one unless it rains actually, because the bowling attacks of both teams are really quite good and New Zealand's batting is terrible. If it rains then that changes though obviously.

Recognition of Property Rights in material objects is the recognition of a man’s right to exist; his right to pursue his own goals in his own manner at his own discretion with what is rightfully his to command. Just as the Right to Life is the right to the property of one’s own person, so the right to own material products is the right to sustain one’s life and to keep the results of one’s own efforts.

I dunno. Yes if you look at their overall record in the past 2 years, it's absolutely no contest at all. But hypothetically, say Southee had been picked for England against India, and bowled as well on as he did for New Zealand in India and SL. Would you be dropping him to bring Broad back into the side for the New Zealand series?

Indeed, Southee's form in the past 6 months has been on a different level to his earlier performances. He is a classic example of someone Bond was referring to whose test game had been badly affected by T20 & ODI cricket.

1) You can see why England got to number 1
2) NZ the only team having won last series against Eng home and away (albeit both in 2008)

NZ always seem to have the upper hand over England in recent times in ODI cricket. Not so in T20 (Eng won 5/6)

Think that's purely a function of when the series were played - NZ were good at ODIs in 2008 and England were terrible. We suddenly stopped being good at ODIs around 2009 and they're arguably our weakest form of the game at present (and that's saying something).

England now seem to be quite good at ODIs; there is something inherently wrong about that statement.

I think New Zealand are more likely to win a Test than draw one unless it rains actually, because the bowling attacks of both teams are really quite good and New Zealand's batting is terrible. If it rains then that changes though obviously.

Yeah our best chance would be a Bracewell-in-Hobart performance, to steal it out from underneath England. Come to think of it, didn't Mills do that last time round?